called by God And such like to desist and cease from all preaching ministration of the Sacraments or using any way the office of Pastors while they receive de â—ovâ— Admission from the generall Assembly under the paine of excommunication to be used against them wherein if they be found disobedient or contradict this Act in any point the sentence of Excommunication after due admonition to be executed against them In the same Assembly holden Anno 1580. Sess. 10. This Article was appointed to be propounded to the King and Councell that the book of Policie might be established by 〈◊〉 Act of privie Councell while a Parliament be holden 〈◊〉 which it might be confirmed by a Law The extent of the Act maâ—e at Dundie was interpreted and explained in the Assembly holden at Glasgow in April 1581. Sess. 6. as followeth Anent the Act made in the Assembly holden at Dundie against Bishops because some difficultie appeared to some Brethren to arise out of the word Office contained in the said Act what should be meaned thereby the Assembly consisting far the most part of such as voted and were present in the Assembly at Dundie to take away the said difficultie resolving upon the true meaning and understanding of the said Act declare that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they are now in Scotland and that the same was the determination and conclusion of the Assembly at this time because some Brethren doubted whether the former Act was to be understood of the Spirituall function onely and others alleaged that the whole office of a Bishop as it was used was damnable and that by the said Act the Bishops should be charged to dimit the same this Assembly declareth that they meaned wholly to condemne the whole estate of Bishops as they were then in Scotland And that this was the meaning of the Assembly at that time The Kings Commissioner presented unto this Assemblie the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before together with a plot of the Presbyteries to be erected which is Registrate in the books of the Assemblie with a Letter to be directed from his Majestie to the Noblemen and Gentlemen of the Countrey for their action of Presbyteries consisting of Pastors and Elders and dissolutions of Prelacies and with an offer to set forward the Policie untill it were established by Parliament The Kings letter subscribed by his hand to the Noblemen and Gentlemen was read in open audience of the whole Assembly This Assembly ordained the book of Policie to be insert in the Register by the Act following For asmuch as travell hath been taken in the framing of the Policie of the Kirk and divers suits have been made by the Magistrate for Approbation thereof which yet hath not taken the happy effect which good men would wish yet that the posteritie may judge well of the present Age and of the meaning of the Kirk the Assemblie hath concluded that the book of Policie agreed to in divers Assemblies before should be registrate in the Acts of the Kirk and remaine therein ad perpetuam rei memoriam And the Copies thereof to be taken to every Presbyterie of which book the Tenor followeth c. Immediately after the inserting of the book of Policie called therâ— the book of Discipline The Assembly ordained that the Confession of Faith be subscribed as followeth Anent the Confession of Faith lately set forth by the Kings Majestie and subscribed by his Highnesse the Assembly in one voyce acknowledgeth the said Confession to be a true Christian and faithfull Confession to be agreed unto by such as truely professe Christ and have a care of Religion and the tenour thereof to be followed out efoldly as the same is laid out in the said Proclamation wherein that Discipline is sworn to In the generall Assemblie holden at Edinburgh in October 1581. Sess. 10. Mr. Robert Montgomery is accused for teaching that discipline is a thing indifferent Sess. 23. The Assemblie gave Commission to the Presbytery of Stirling to charge Mr. Robert Montgomery to continue in the Ministry of Stirling and not to meddle with any other office or function of the Kirk namely in aspiring to the Bishoprick of Glasgow against the Word of God and Acts of the Kirk under the pain of Excommunication In the same Assembly it is acknowledged that the estate of Bishops is condemned by the Kirk Commission for erection of moe Presbyteries was renewed and a new Ordinance made for subscribing the Confession of Faith and to proceed against whatsoever persons that would not aknowledge and subscribe the same In the Assembly holden in April 1582. there was a new Commission for erection of Presbyteries where none was at yet erected Mr. Robert Montgomery pretending to be Bishop of Glasgow was ordained to be deposed and excommunicate except he gave evident tâ—kens of Repentance and promise to superseed which he did not and therefore was excommunicate shortly after according to the ordinance of this Assembly In the generall Assembly holden at Edinburgh 1582. The Generall Assembly gave Commission to some Presbyteries to try and censure such as were called Bishops for the great slander arising by their impunitie Commission was given at this Assembly to present some Articles to the Councell and estates for approving and establishing by their authoritie the Presbyteries the Synodall and Generall Assemblies in the 19. Sess. the Assemblie declared that 〈◊〉 Bishop may â—it upon the Councell in name of the Kirk In the Assemblie holden Anno 1586. these two Articles were agreed upon First It is found that all such as the Scripture appointeth Governors of the Kirk to wit Pastors Doctors and Elders may conveene to the generall Assemblies and vote in Ecclesiasticall matters Secondly There are foure Office-bearers set down to us by the Scriptures to wit Pastors Doctors Elders and Deâ—cons and the name of Bishop ought not to be taken as it hath been in the time of Papistry but is common to all Pastors and Ministers In the Assembly holden Anno 1587. Sess. 8. It was ordained that the admission of Mr. Robert Montgomery by the Presbyterie of Glasgow suppose to the Temporalitie of the Bishoprick only be undone and anulled with all possible diligence to the effect Slander might be removed from the Kirk In Sess. 15. Mr. Rob. Pont sheâ—ed the Kings presentation to the Bishoprick of Cathnes and desired the Iudgement of the Assemblie The Assemblie in their Letter to the Kings Majestie declared that they judged the said Mr. Rob to be a Bishop already according to the doctrine of S. Paul but as to that corrupt estate or office of these who hath been termed Bishops heretofore they found it not agreeable to the word of God and that it hath been 〈◊〉 in divers Assemblies before In the Instructions given to such as were appointed to waitâ— upon the Parliament it was ordained in the same Assembly Sess. 17. thâ—t they be carefull that
of Parliament before this Abjuration was sworn by which limitation is excluded from this oath all points of Doctrine and Discipline added since either by Acts of Generall Assemblies Synods or Presbyteries since that Confession was received as that Act of the Assemblie at Dâ—ndie 1580. and at Glâ—sgow 1581. Condemning Episcopacie and others of that kinde and such are our Covenanters Additions or Applications of the Confession of Faith expressed in their Rebellioâ—s Covenant And the truth is that they neither have nor can produce one word of that Confession condemning this power and preheminence neither had the Church who established it any such purpose or intention to doe so But on the contrary the same Church at the same very time in setting down the first book of Discipline did approve that power and preheminencie under the title of Superintendents therefore this point was not abjured by the Oath Fourthly the matter of this Oath is determined to be that doctrine and discipline Which was for a long time before the first framing of this Oath professed by the King and whole body of this Kingdome But so it is that no point of Doctrine condemning this power and preheminence was professed for a long time before this by the King or body of the Kingdome therefore that power and preheminence was not abjured by that Oath For the Kings profession we have shown Cap. 6. what it was at that time and both before and after then the profession of the whole body of the Kingdome cannot be determined by particular mens opinions but by publik Acts either by the Supreme Civill or Ecclesiastick Court And they have not produced any Act of either of those Courts long before shewing such a profession and therefore it is to be presupposed that there was none such But on the contrary we can produce Acts of both those Courts not onely long before but also continually since the Reformation yea at that same very time when this Abjuration was first made and some yeers after standing in force approving this power and preheminence the first Act they can produce having any appearance of condemning Episcopacie as unlawfull is that Act of the Assemblie at Dundee 1580. which notwithstanding doth not serve their purpose first because this Act was not long before if not after this Abjuration was first framed being even that same very year about that same time Secondly albeit the office of a Bishop as it was then in Scotland be condemned yet notwithstanding this point that it was lawfull that one Pastor might have power and preheminence given him was agreed unto by the whole Assemblie as we have signified before and shall more fully declare hereafter Thirdly long before this the power and preheminencie of Superintendents and Commissioners was publikly approved by the first book of Discipline and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies even then and some years after standing in force unrepealed which we have before faithfully cited cap. 5. And as for the civill Courts both of Councell and Parliament they declared their profession by rejecting of divers suits made for ratifying the second book of Discipline which seemed to condemne this power and preheminence as in the Assemblies 1578. 1579. and 1580. cited here by themselves It is declared that divers suits were made for establishing the second book of Discipline by Act of Parliament or otherwise if that could not be obtained by Act of Councell but both the one and the other were often refused Moreover it was declared by the King and whole body of the Kingdome assembled in Parliament at Edinburgh May 22. 1584. that they had no such profession but on the contrary in the 129. Act of that Parliament representing the whole body of the Kingdome the whole power preheminence and Iurisdiction of Bishops was ratified and confirmed in most ample forme By which it is evident that there was no point of Doctrine long before the swearing of this Covenant received beleeved and defended by the King and whole body of the Kingdome condemning this power and preheminence now in question And therefore that it was not abjured by the Oath of the Covenant And since it is so it is strange with what face or conscience they can so 〈◊〉 abuse Christian people as to impose falsly â—uch a burden upon the Consciences of all persons within the Kingdome both King and Subjects Pastors and people in pressing to perswade them against so many evident reasons that they are all by vertue of that Oath so fearfully perjured who have consented to the 〈◊〉 of Episcopacie But because this point of Episcopacie is understood by them rather to be abjured under the name of Discipline than under the name of Doctrine therefore to take away all way of Escape or subtâ—rfuge we shall examine the point of Discipline also and shew how farre it is included in the Oath and albeit it be by all those former limitations excluded also for these limitations are to be applied aswell to the Discipline as to the Doctrine Yet for further resolution we must consider that the word Discipline is taken in divers significations first strictly and properly for that part of the Policie which concerneth the censures of the Church to be practised upon those who doe erre either in doctrine or in manners of life And so Episcopacie or power and preheminence of one Pastor over others is not contrary thereto but may very well subsist therewith and hath subsisted actually both during the Governement under Superintendents or Commissioners as also under the Government of Bishops since they were re-established for the same censures which were established by the book of Discipline by the order set down before our Psalm books and by divers Acts of Generall Assemblies long before Bishops were re-established did still remaine the same admoâ—itions private and publik the same sentence of excomâ—unication and manner of proceeding therein by three private and three publik Citations before Ecclesiasticall Indicatories the same publik prayers â—ppointed by order of the Church of repentance to the delinquent upon three severall Sabbath dayes the same forme of pronouncing the sentence and enjoyning private or publik satisfaction the same manner of receiving and absolving of the penâ—tent As all within the Church of Scotland doe know And therefore it is evident that this power and prehâ—minence of Bishops is not contrary to the Disciplâ—â—e of the Church of Scotland taken in this â—eale 〈◊〉 apparently it is taken in the Oath for in â—ll speeches or wâ—â—â—s of conâ—sequencâ— chiâ—â—â— those which are see down for a solâ—â—â— oath â—hich ought to be plain and cleer the words 〈◊〉 be taken in their proper and most usuall sense rather than in an unproper and figurative except by some evident reason it appear that it must be taken improperly And this certainly is the most proper and usuall meaning of this word Discipline as it is taken in the order set down before our Psalm books in the second book of Discipline
is common to every one of them that hath a particular flock but dissembles the other points of agreement which we have rehearsed importing this power and preheminence because they found them directly contrary to their Conclusion Thirdly albeit they intended at this Assemblie presently to have thrown down Episcopacie to the ground yet because many wise learned and godly Brethren did oppose them standing firmly for the ancient discipline of the Church there passed five or six years in these contestations before the finall sentence was pronounced in the mean time those Episcopomastiges ceased not to labour diligently by all meanes to draw others to their judgement using likewise the perswasions of men of speciall note beyond Seas as in the time of the Contestation the Lord Glames then Chancellor of Scotland was moved by our Genevating Ministers to write to Beza craving his opinion concerning the present Government under Bishops Superintendents to the which letter Beza made a large answer condemning the present Government and setting down a plot of that Policie and Discipline which he desired them to imbrace according to the which they did frame their second book of Discipline and that in many points ipsissimis verbis as may appear by conferring the Book with his Epistle That second citation from the Assembly April 1576. serves nothing to their purpose for albeit Some Bishops were censured because they had not betaken themselves to a particular flock yet this might consist with power and preheminence over other as is cleer in the Superindents who albeit they had particular flocks wherein they were specially bound to attend in preaching the Word and administration of Sacraments yet that did not hinder but that they might have charge over other Pastors and moe Parishes Finally those corruptions of the estate of Bishops which are set down in the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1578. were not fully concluded in that Assembly to be damned absolutely but only proposed by some and craved to be considered CHAP. XII Answering to the Acts for establishing of the second Book of Discipline THe second Rank of Acts cited out of Generall Assemblies are those which concern the establishing of the second Book of Discipline such as are that Act of the Assembly in April 1578. Sess. 4. that in April 1578. Iuly 1579. Iuly 1580. Sess. 10. April 1581. 1590. 1591. Sess. 4. to the which they need no particular Answer but Generally concerning this book of Discipline we answer first that this Book of Discipline was brought in head and urged by the same means and occasions whereof we spake before to subvert the former established Government and to bear down Bishops that the Church the more easie might be robbed of her patrimonie by Noblemen and Courtiers gaping after the Church-rents and factious humours striving to singularity contrary to the mind of the wisest and gravest and most modest of the Ministry and opposed continually by the King Councel and whole body of the Kingdome as the very Acts themselves here produced by them doe evidently declare Secondly the Acts of those Assemblies can be of no greater force than the book it self for the establishing whereof they were made But so it is that this Book is not in it self that Discipline whereunto we swear to joyne our selves in the Oath of the Covenant first because at this time the book of Discipline was but onely a thing in fieri not as yet concluded when the Oath was made and therefore could not be accounted to be comprehended therein for that Ordinance of the Assemblie at Glasgow 1581. whereby that Discipline was appointed to be registrated in the Assembly books did not make it a binding Law neither was it intended for that end but as it is expresly set down in the Act it self ad perpetuam rei memoriam and that the posteritie should think well of the intention of the Church So it was but a thing intended by the Church but not effected as likewise that Ordinance of the Assembly at Glasgow 1590. concerning the subscription to that book did not extend it self to all but to actuall Ministers only and yet of those many did resist it as particularly the Ministers of Angus and Mearâ—es and divers other parts of the Kingdome for the which cause it was thought needfull that a new Act should be made Anno 1591. injoyning againe the subscription under a penalty and particularly to those of Angus and Mearâ—es This book was never ratified by any Act of Estate either in Councell or Parliament without the which they themselves confesse it could not be a Law as they doe in that Assembly Iuly 1579. and that Assembly 1580 Sess. 10. As for that Act of Parliament 1592. here alleaged first it was after the last urging of the swearing of the Covenant 1591. and therefore could not be included in the Oath Secondly it was but a partiall ratification not of the whole book but of Generall Synodall and of Presbyteriall Assemblies and Parish Sessions which did still remaine under Episcopall government with greater regularitie than they were before 2. This book of Discipline many years after the first motion thereof could not be agreed unto by the greatest and best part of the Ministrie finding it for the most part but an Imaginary plot which could be hardly effectuate or indure long in the Church without great corruption as the event proved Some of it never put in practice either in the Church of Scotland or any other Church in the world like to the frame of Policie in Plato's Republik or of Outopia as those points de Diaconatu concerning the collecting and distribution of the rents of the Church in some points the contrary hath ever been practised as it is appointed by that Book Cap. 7. That Landward Churches should not nor could not have particular Elderships and yet ever after there was not so small a Landward Church but had their particular Sessions consisting of the Ministers Elders and Deacons It is likewise there appointed that Elders once lawfully called to the office may never leave it again and yet it hath ever been an use that he who was Elder this year should be casheered the next and every year a new Election made Item it is ordained Cap. 3. That all Ecclesiasticall Parsons as Pastors Elders and Deacons should receive the Ceremonie of ordination to their office which are declared to be Fasting and Prayer and imposition of hands of Elderships and yet they did never practise imposition of hands upon Elders or Deacons but only in the Ordination of Pastors many other points might be brought which either were never practised or the contrary practice brought in 3. If this Book of Discipline be a declaration of the meaning of Church whereby the negative Confession in the Covenant should be interpreted then those who have sworn the Covenant have sworn also to this Book of Discipline if it be so then which of all the Covenanters can free themselves of perjurie for
Estate and did represent the whole Church therein both by the consent of the Church and fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome so that to the enacting of any Law the consent of Prelates was ever thought as necessarie as any of the other two Estates And therefore since by the fundamentall Laws of this Kingdome no Act in Civill or Ecclesiasticall matters ever had the strength of a binding Law without the consent of all the three Estates whosoever will prease to suppresse the estate of Prelates doe reverse and destroy the very fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome 5. To come yet neerer to the reformed Church of Scotland at the very first reformation those who were appointed in the place of Bishops called Superintendents had by Commission from the Church as great power and preheminence over other Pastors and all the Parishes within the bounds of the charge committed to them as Bishops doe now require in their Diocese It is true the Superintendents had not vote in Parliament nor could have for why the Bishops retained still their possession in those places upon their ancient Commission often ratified in Parliament both before and after the Reformation never quarrelled by any Generall Assemblie of the Church untill that Assemblie at Edinburgh in October 1578. wherein the Bishops are required only not to vote in Parliament in name of the Church without speciall Commission thereâ—ra And a few years before to wit at the Assemblie at Ediâ—burgh 1573. the whole Iurisdiction and power of Bishops is expresly allowed by the Church with some exceptious not very materiall as we remarked before and yet there is no mention of excepting this power to vote in Parliament in name of the Church whereby they doe tacitely at the least approve this the ancient Commission of the Bishops to vote in Parliament in name of the Church Finally at the last re-establishing of Bishops Thu Commission to vote in Parliament in name of the Church was expresly given to them by the Church for first by that Assemblie at Montrosse 1600. the Church gave Commission to a certaine number of Ministers though not under the title of Bishops to have a care of the Generall affaires of the Church and to voice in Parliament in name of the Church then the generall Assemblies at Glasgoâ— and Lithgow in the year 1606. 1608. 1610. they did under the very title of Bishops receive full Commission from the Church not only to vote in Parliament but likewise to exercise their whole Iurisdiction power and and preheminence over all Pastors and people within the bounds of their Diocese and so every Bishop particularly by their election and consecration receives power to use this Commission whensoever occasion shall be offered neither is it necessary that for every severall Act they doe in name of the Church they have a new particular Commission for that effect but it is sufficient that by the consent of the Church and Estates of the Kingdome this power is annexed to the office of a Bishop for ever so that whosoever should be elected to that office should have this Commission once for all during his life time or untill by his malversation in his charge he be lawfully and legally deprived It is true indeed that the Church may adde new Articles to their Commission as times and occasions requires as is done in England and Ireland where the Convocation of the Clergie sits ever in the time of Parliament to consider upon such Articles as are thought by common consent to serve for the wee l of the Church and by them are presented to the Bishops that by their care they may receive due ratification but the turbulent behaviour of some Ministers in Scotland who scornes to have their petitions proposed orderly by the Bishops hath as yet barred the Clergie of Scotland from that priviledge Now to conclude this point since for ought we can see the only exception that the Church of Scotland hath made against any point of the function of Bishops at that time when Episcopacie was condemned as unlawfull Anno 1580. 1581. is that they had not their power and preheminence by Commission from the Church or generall Assemblie and since that exception as we have shown is now removed it is evident that those Acts of the Assemblies at Dundee 1580. and at Glasgow 1581. doe not serve to prove the Conclusion of this Assemblie and therefore are impertinently alleaged CHAP. XIIII Discussing the rest of the Acts of Assemblies here cited SInce all the rest of the Acts in the subsequent Assemblies against Bishops are grounded upon these two former Acts whereby the office of a Bishop was condemned and since we have shown in the former Chapter that they doe not serve to prove the Conclusion of this Assemblie and therefore the rest of the Acts depending thereupon must have as little strength as they so that we need not to insist in the particular discussing of every one of them yet lest it be thought that we have over past them altogether we shall remark some few particular observations upon them whereby it may be perceived that if they serve not for their purpose here yet that they serve in divers points against them First those Acts cited here concerning the presentation by the King and admission by the Presbytery of Glasgow of M. Robert Montgomerie to the office of the Archbishop of Glasgow and of M. Robert Poâ—s to be Bishop of Caithâ—es and the divers ineffectuall suits made by the Generall Assemblies to the King Councell and Parliament for advancing of their Presbyteriall Discipline and suppression of Bishops to wit those presented by the Assemblies 1580. 1581. 1587. serves against them in so farre as they declare that their violent proceedings against Bishops and for establishing of their new discipline was not allowed by the Kings Majestie and Councell and whole body of the Kingdome in Parliament all this time but directly resisted as contrary to their wills and manifest intentions whereby it is evident that neither the King nor the Councell nor the whole body of the Kingdome had any such meaning or intention as by that oath of the Covenant to abjure Episcopacie 2. Although that the King and estate suffered an Act to passe in Parliament 1592. establishing in a part their new discipline yet was it not their meaning to approve the same directly But for a pregnant reason of estate they did tollerate lesser evils that greater might be eschewed for at that time it is well known that the King and estate were mightily astonished by the late discovery of a dangerous conspiracie of sundry Noblemen of greatest power in the Kingdome by the practice of some trasâ—ieking Iesuites and Gentlemen affected to the Popish Religion such as Father Creightou father Abercromy Sir William Graham of Fentry M. George Carr and others who brought in great summes of Spanish gold and promised greater whereby those Noblemen and many others of their Faction were corrupted to betray their
EPISCOPACIE NOT ABIVRED IN HIS MAIESTIES REALME OF SCOTLAND CONTAINING MANY Remarkable passages NEWLY PVBLISHED The Contents of the severall Chapters follow in the next page Printed 1641. The Contents of the severall Chapters in this BOOK CHAP. I. COntaining a Comparison betwixt this Assemblie and the Councell of Trent 1. They agree in like subtill policie in their proceedings specified in 6. points 2. They disagree in that the Councell of Trent in externall order was more formall than this and more substantiall in discussing the Articles CHAP. II. Containing two reasons why we intend to speak onely against the Act condemning Episcopacie 1. Because the rest of the Acts are established upon the same grounds 2. Because their principall purpose in desiring this Assembly was to suppresse Episcopacie 3. The Act it self is set down verbatim as it was set down in their printed Coppie subscribed by the Clerk CHAP. III. Discussing their foure Considerations in their preface whereby they alleage they were moved to make this Act 1. The Consideration of the great mercie of God in the work of the reformation wherein three notable falshoods are remarked 2. That many evill innovations were obtruded upon the Church wherein also three notable falshoods are remâ—rked 3. That by the Kings urging the book of Common Prayer they were moved of Necessitie to make their Covenant wherein are remarked 7. notable falshoods 4. That many having subscribed the Covenant without their applications yet according to the meaning it had 1580. therefore it is necessary that the Assembly should declare the true meaning wherein are shown divers falshoods and impertinencies CHAP. IIII. Containing the state of the Question as it was proponed to be voyced in the Assemblie 1. The necessitie of right stating the Question 2. That their proposition is captious and confused including three severall Questions of divers natures wherunto no one Categoricall answer could be given 3. That they set it down in many ambiguous words and termes 4. It is sophistically and subtilly drawn à Thesâ—ad Hypothesin 5. That being proposed in that manner it could not possibly resolve the doubts but rather increase them 6. The Question simply proposed had been fitter to resolve doubts 7. There are two points which they intend to prove unlawfull in Episcopacie 1. That they have charge over moâ— particular â—â—ocks than one 2. That they have power and preheminence over their Brethren CHAP. V. That this power and preheminence is not contrarie to the Confession of Faith in the Church of Scotland but most conforme thereto and to the first book of Discipline and continuall practice of the Church of Scotland 1. A distinction of the Confessions of Faith so called in a positive and negative and that the positive is the only proper Confession of the Church of Scotland 2. That there is no Article of this Confession condemning this power and preheminence 3. That the meaning of this Confession concerning the point of Government set down in the first book of Discipline and long practice of the Church doth expresly approve the same 4. A paralell betwixt Superintendents and Bishops wherein is shown that the power of Superintendents was no lesse than that which Bishops require now 5. That Bishops retaining the office title and Benefice of Bishops had the power for 20. yeers after the reformation and that by approbation both of the Church and Civill estate CHAP. VI That this power and preheminence of Bishops was not abjured by the negative Confession or Covenant 1. That this negative Confession is not the proper Confession of the Church of Scotland but an Appendix thereof 2. That it is only the first Confession whereunto all were sworn to adhere 3. Two reasons shewing that by the oath of the Covenant or negative Confession Episcopacie was not abjured 1. Because it cannot have a meaning contrary to that whereof it is an Appendix 2. Because it belongeth only to the King and not to an Assemblie of the Church without the King to declare in what sense the oath was required CHAP. VII An Answer to those passages alleaged in the Act out of the Abjuration 1. Answered in Generall by Consideration of the words themselves 2. By the confession of the Moderator and his associats 3. A particular answer to the first passage shewing it to be cited falsly and impertinently CHAP. VIII An Answer to the second passage of the Covenant wherein is shown clearly 1. A notable falshood in the citation both by changâ—ng words and adding others not contained in the originall 2. Divers reasons why this passage doth prove nothing to their purpose CHAP. IX An Answer to the third passage wherein are these particulars 1. It is shown to be impertinent 2. What is meaned by the word Hierarchie 3. That there may be an Hierarchie neither Antichristian nor wicked proved by the testimony of Calvin 4. Their first reason to prove that Episcopall Government is the Antichristian wicked Hierarchie is by a false Syllogisme ex omnibus particularibus affirmantibus in secundâ figurâ 5. This reason passable amongst themselves because no man durst examine it under paine of the censure of the Church 6. Their second reason childish and Sophisticall 7. Their third reason impertinently applied 8. Their fourth reason hath no consequence and farre from the purpose 9. Their last reason is grounded upon a place in the second book of Discipline falsly related CHAP. X. An Answer to the fourth passage containing three particulars 1. An explaining of the words 2. That the Doctrine and Discipline whereunto we are sworn to joyne our selvs is not all the doctrine and discipline taught and practised in the Church of Scotland 3. That this Doctrine is expresly limitated in the Covenant by foure limitations by every one of which it is cleered that this power and preheminence of Bishops is not abjured 4. The first limitation that we swear only to adhere to that which is taught by Gods Word wherein there is nothing contrary to this point but all is conforme thereto 5. The second limitation is that Doctrine which is professed by many notable Realms and Churches no Realm nor Church did condemne this except Geneâ—a and that not absolutely but many Churches did approve it expresly 6. The third limitation is the doctrine particularly expressed in the first Confession of Faith but no doctrine is expressed therein contrary to this point 7. The fourth limitation is that Doctrine which was for a long time before professed by the King and whole body of the Kingdome But the King and body of the Kingdome did expresly professe that they did approve this point here damned 8. The discipline is limitated by the same limitation 9. The discipline is either taken in a strict and proper sense for the censures of the Church or else in a large sense signifying the whole policy of the Church 10. In the first sense it was as yet retained precisely in the Church of Scotland under Episcopall Government and
the reformed Church of Scotland for many yeares after the reformation And though repressed for a time yet re-established again by divers more lawfull Assemblies than this ratified by divers Act of Parliament and continued now for many yeeres by-gon there behoved to be many and weighty reasons why such a Doctrine should be conversed with a serious deliberation to ponder and consider them yet neverthelesse in this Assembly in one short Session the whole matter was proponed discussed voiced concluded and a large Act past thereupon CHAP. II. Concerning the Act against Episcopacie ALbeit it were an easie matter to refute all the controverted Acts of this Assemblie yet leaving the rest at this time we intend onely to examine that Act Sess. 26. Decemb. 8. Against Episcopacie And that for two reasons especially First because the grounds whereupon this Act is concluded are the self-same whereupon all the rest of the controverted Acts are grounded and therefore these grounds being declared evidently to be infirme and weak it will also appear that together with this Act of Episcopacie All the rest of their Acts depending thereupon shall be found to be ruinous as I trust their fall shall be suddain Secondly because the principall aime of the most and chiefest of these who were members of that Conventicle was to suppresse Bishops because they esteemed them chiefly to have crossed their Sacrilegious and ambitious 〈◊〉 I or â—efore Bishops were re-established the Noblemen and Baroâ—s both possessed the substance of the Church renâ—s and also ruled the whole Eâ—tate at their pleasure in Councell and Parliament by their own voyces and voyces of the Gentry and Borroughs whom those factious 〈◊〉 did depend for the most part upon one Noble man or other then finding that by the re-establishing of Bishops their rents were taken out of their hands and that they were like to loose their Abbeyes and Prioâ—ies also and finally that their particular ends not alwayes tending to the weell of the Church or Kingdome or Honour of the Prince were crossed by the estate of Bishops no marvell then though they be moved by all meanes possible to suppresse them and for that effect have laboured to make use of the simplicitie of some of the Ministrie and proud humours of others impatient of Subjection to lawfull Authoritie of whom some having aimed in vaine at Bishopricks as is well known of divers of the Ring-leaders of that Faction thought it best for their credit to declare a great contempt of that estate which they had with much labour sought after without the desired effect according to the fable of the Fox others by their former misdemeanors both against the Church and Regall Authority being past hope of further advancement did easily condescend to shake off that yoak which their turbulent humours could never suffer them patiently to bear those were made to blow the trumpet of Rebellion both in their Pulpits and private conferences drawing the people after them and the simplest sort of Ministers also who did not judiciously remark their secret ends cloaked under the colour of Religion and libertie of the Church by which meanes this condemning of Episcopacie was brought in head with all the consequences thereof This is the point we mean to examine for the present and that you may see the weaknes of their reasons the better we shall set down verbatim the Act it self as it was conceived by them Act of the Assemblie at Glasgow Sess. 16. Decemb. 8. 1638. Declaring Episcopacie to have been adjured by the Confession of Faith 1580. And to be removed out of this Kirk THe Assemblie taking to their most grave and serious Consideration first the unspeakable goodnesse and great mercie of God manifested to this Nation in that so necessarie so difficult and so excellent and divine work of Reformation which was at last brought to such perfection that this Kirk was reformed not onely in Doctrine and Worship but also after many conferences and publik reasonings in divers Nationall Assemblies joyned with solemn humiliations and prayers to God the Discipline and Government of the Kirk as the hedge and guard of the doctrine and worship was prescribed according to the rule of Gods word in the book of Policie and Discipline agreed upon in the Assemblie 1578. and insert in the Register 1581. established by the Acts of the Assemblies by the confession of Faith sworn and subscribed at the direction of the Assembly and by continuall practice of this Kirk Secondly that by men seeking their own things and not the things of Iesus Christ divers Novations have been introduced to the great disturbance of this Kirk so firmely once compacted and to the endangering of Religion and many grosse evils obtruded to the utter 〈◊〉 of the work of Reformationâ— and change of the whole form of worship and fâ—ce of this Kirk commanded to receive with reverence a new Book of Common prayer as the onely form to be used in Gods publik worship and 〈◊〉 Contraveeners to be condignely censured and punished and after many supplications and complaints knowing no other way for the preservation of Religion were moved by God and drawn by necessity to 〈◊〉 the Nationall Covenant of this Kirk and kingdome which the Lord since hath blessed from Heaven and to subscribe the confession of faith with an Application thereof abjuring the great evils wherewith they were now pressed and suspending the practice of all Novations formerly introduced till they should be tryed in a free generall Assembly lastly that some of his Majesties Subjects of sundry ranks have by his Majesties command subscribed and renewed the confession of Faith without the former explication And that both the one and the other Subscribers have subscribed the said Confession in this year as it was professed and according to the meaning that it had in this Kingdome when it was first subscribed â—581 and afterward The Assemblie therfore 〈◊〉 by the Subscription of his Majesties high Commissioner 〈◊〉 of the Lords of secret Councell Sept. 22. 1638. and by the Acts of Councell of the date foresaid bearing that they should subscribe the said Confession and ordaining all his Majesties Subjects to subscribe the same according to the foresaid date and tenor and as it was then professed within this Kingdome As likewise by the protestation of some of the Senators of the Colledge of Iustice when they were required to subscribe and by the many doubtings of his Majesties good subjects especially because the Subscribers of the Confession in February 1638. are bound to suspend the approbations of the corruptions of the Government of the Kirk 〈◊〉 they be tryed in a free generall Assemblie finding it proper for them and most necessarie and incumbent to them to give out the true meaning therof as it was at first profest that all his Majesties Subjects in a matter so important as is the publik Confession of Faith so solemnly sworn and subscribed may be of one mind and one heart and have 〈◊〉 satisfaction
moe particular â—â—ocks condemned by this Act. 3. They framed the question in this manner to strike a terror of a fearfull perjurie upon the weak Consciences of these who could not discerne rightly either the quality of the Oath or the matter thereof to make them more plyable to their Rebellious projects perswading them that the swearers themselves and all their posteritie were bound to the observation of that Oath according to their false interpretation notwithstanding of any interveening Law or Constitution absolving them from it and that this fearfull perjurie could never be expiated except they renewed their Oath to that Covenant together with their false Applications and perverse interpretations farre different yea flat contrary to their meaning who framed the Confession of Faith and injoyned the Oath which as we shall shew is but an Imaginarie fear It had been more plaine dealing and fitter to have removed all doubts if they had proposed the Question more simply and in more perspicuous termes asking Whether the Office of a Bishop be lawfull in it self or not for if it had been solidly proven by Gods Word to be unlawfull then it had been evident also that the Oath whereby it was abjured was lawfull and no man could have doubted but that Oath did bind both the Actuall swearers and all their posterity to the observation thereof but if it had been found by cleer Scripture that the Office of a Bishop had been lawfull then no man could have doubted but the Oath whereby they did abjure it was unlawfull and therefore that no man was bound to the observation thereof but by the contrary all were bound in Conscience to break such an Oath or if it had been found of middle nature neither simply unlawfull nor necessarily lawfull at all times but a thing indifferent in the power of the Church and Supreme Magistrate to make a Law either establishing or abolishing the same who might also require an Oath of all to observe that Law then certainly no man could have doubted but that so long as that positive Law stood in force that Oath did bind all Subjects to the observation of it as likewise that the Law being abolished by lawfull Authoritie no man was further bound but was ipso facto absolved from the Oath So the Question being propounded in this manner and resolved any other wayes it had cleered all doubts and moved all to be of One mind and one heart but being propounded in their manner no resolution did take away all doubts as they promised to doe by this Act but rather did multiplie them and make them greater For albeit it had been cleered that Episcopacie had been abjured by the Oath of the Covenant which notwithstanding is not done yet a greater doubt remained whether that Abjuration was lawfull or not which could not be resolved except it had been first made manifest that Episcopacie was unlawfull in it self by Gods Word Yet that we may follow them in their own method and reason upon their own grounds we shall leave at this time the probations which may be brought for the office of a Bishop from Gods Word and practice of the Primitive Church which hath been sufficiently performed by divers learned Divines to the which the best of that Sect could never sufficiently answer Taking then the Question as it is set downe by them there are two points which they onely here condemne in that office first that they have charge over moe Parishes than one secondly that they have power and preheminencie over their Brethren we shall make it therefore evident 1. That by the Confession of Faith Books of Discipline Acts of Generall Assemblies and long continued practice of the Church of Scotland at the reformation and many yeers after this preheminence and power of one Pastor over others and charge over moe parishes than one hath been acknowledged to be lawfull Secondly we shall shew that none of those passages brought by them at length in the Act it self which doubtlesse were the strongest they could find forth of the abjuration in the Covenant books of Discipline and Acts of former generall assemblies doe prove their conclusion but that all of them are either falsly or impertinently cited farre by or contrary to the meaning of the Authors and therefore that all of them are Sophystically alleaged CHAP. V. That this preheminence and power of Bishops here questioned is conforme to the true Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland to the first Book of Discipline and the long continued practice of the Church FIrst we must observe that there are two Confessions of Faith so called in the Church of Scotland as we have remarked before to wit that large Confession established at the first reformation framed by Iohn Knox and other faithfull Ministers Anno 1560. Confirmed by divers generall Assemblies received by the whole body of the Kingdome ratified by Act of Parliament 1567. and inserted in the body of the Act which is the only proper Confession of the Church of Scotland containing all the positive grounds of the Reformed Religion especially in matters of Faith controverted betwixt us and the Papists and other Hereticks the other called commonly the Negative Confession which is not properly a perfeâ—t Confession but an Appendix of the former framed not by any Ordinance of the Assemblie of the Church but by the appointment of the Kings Majestie and Councell first sworn and subscribed by the Kings Majestie himself and his houshold then by an Act of Councell dated the 5. of March 1580. It was ordained that all persons within the Kingdome should swear the same and for more commodious doing thereof it was presented by his Majesties Commissioners to the Assemblie holden at Glasgow 1581. that they might approve it and injoyne every Minister to see the Oath taken by all their Parishioners and it did containe an abjuration of most speciall grosse errors of Poperie the same abjuâ—ation was againe commanded by the King to be renewed in the year 1590. when as that Conspiracie of some Papists trafficking with the King of Spaine was discovered having annexed thereto a generall band or Covenant whereby all the Subjects bindes themselves with the Kings Majestie for maintenance of true Religion according to the Confession of Faith set down at the first reformation and for the defence of the Kings Majesties person Authoritie and estate against all Enemies within and without the Kingdome to the end that true professors and his Majesties loyall Subjects might more easily be discerned from hypocriticall Papists and seditious Rebells Now as for that onely perfect Confession there is no clause nor Article therein which either expresly or by any probable consequence condemneth this power and preheminencie here controverted neither have they been so bold as to alleage any passage out of the same nor was it the meaning of those godly and learned persons who set it down and proposed it to be received by the Church and Kingdome of Scotland nor
the meaning of the Church and Kingdome who accepted and approved the same as the true Doctrine proved by Gods Word thereby to condemne any such thing yea it is most evident that they had a quite contrary meaning as they themselves did publikly declare in the first book of Discipline shewing therein what manner of Government and Policie they doe require in the true reformed Church to wit that it should be governed by Superintendents in every Province having power and preheminence over all the Ministers and all the Parishes within their bounds for this book of Discipline was framed by the same persons who set down that confession of Faith and at the same very time or shortly thereafter and that by the command and direction of the great Councell of Scotland admitted to the Government by common consâ—nt of the whole estates in the Queens absence being for the time in France and ratifiâ—â—â— by Act of Councell and manuall subscriptions of the Counsellors and of divers other men of worth the 17. of Ianuary 1560. approved by many generall Assemblies and the continuall practice of the Church for twice as many years thereafter as Presbyteriall Governmental remained in force Then that we may see how farre this power of Superintendents did extend we must consider that the first Reformers of Religion because of the detestable enormities of Papisticall Bishops which made their persons offices and very names to be detested out of a certaine zealous scrupulositie would not at first give the title of Bishops to the rulers of the Church yet neverthelesse by the example of many other reformed Churches gave to those who were appointed to their charge a title of the same signification calling them Superintendents So changing a proper Greek word into a barbarous Latine for the Greek word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and the Latine word Superintendens doe both signifie one thing to wit such a one as is set over others to oversee their actions Albeit by this book of Discipline the whole Kingdome was divided in ten Dioceses expresly so called and over every Diocese a Superintendent appointed to be set yet in all the books of Assemblies we find onely foure who carried expresly this title to wit Mâ— Iohn Spotswood father to the late deceased Iohn Archbishop of St. Anâ—â—â—ws called Superintendent of Lâ—â—thran or Edinburgh Iohn Areskin of Diune Superintendent of Angus and Mearnes or of Brechin Mr. Iohn Wonram Superintendent of Fyfe or S. Andrews M. Iohn Wâ—llocks Superintendent of the West or Glasgow those who were set over the rest of the Dioceses were called Commissioners either because at that time they could not fiâ—d so many sufficient men or for lack of sufficient meanes to maintaine the estate of Superintendents or as some rather thinke because they esteemed this too absolute a Title and neere in signification to the title of Bishop therfore they thought it more fit to call them Commissioners as importing morse a dependencie upon the generall Assemblie of the Church from which they received Commission to exercise their charge not for any definite time but ad vitam or ad culpam Those same are at sometimes called Visitores by a word of the like signification with Episcopus for {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} signifieth likewise a Visitor and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} Visitation as 1 Pet. â— 12. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is translated by all interpreters in dievisitationis and so the Hebrew word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} from the known word {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} visitavit by the Septuagints is translated {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and by Latines Inspector Visitator or Praefectus Howsoever they were diversly named they had all a like power and Iurisdiction which was no lesse then in the Church of Scotland than the power which the Bishops had in the ancient Church or in the Church of Scotland these many yeers by-gone as may appeare by this paralell betwixt the power of Bishops and the power of Superintendents A Paralell betwixt the power of Bishops and the power of Superintendents FIrst as every Bishop hath his own Diocese over the which he hath Superioritie and Iurisdiction and therin a speciall Citie for his sea and place of Residence called the Metropolitan or Cathedrall Citie So every 〈…〉 by the first book of Discipline Cap. 5. Art 2. 〈…〉 pointed to him his own Diocese to have 〈◊〉 power over all persons both pastors and people 〈◊〉 that bounds and therein a certaine place of ordinary residence called there the Superintendents towne which for the most part were the same Cities from which the Bishops of Scotland are now denominated Secondly As all the Clergie in every Diocese are bound to give 〈◊〉 obedience to their ordinary Bishop according to 〈◊〉 Canons of the Church Right so by a speciall 〈…〉 Generall Assembly at Edinburgh Iuly 30. 1562. It is concluded by the whole ministers there Assembled that all Ministers shall be Subâ—â—ct to their Superintendents in all lawfull 〈…〉 as well in the book of Discipline as in 〈…〉 Election of Superintendents which is no other 〈…〉 but Canonicall obedience Thirdly As all Bishops are to be 〈…〉 of Generall or Nationall Councels 〈…〉 been in all ages and needed not any 〈…〉 thereto from the time that they were 〈…〉 consecrated to that office So likewise in all 〈…〉 Superintendents and Commissionâ—◠〈◊〉 were constant principall members of 〈…〉 Assemblies and needed not any particular Commission thereto but being once admitted to the office were ever acknowledged thereafter and received without any other Commission as is evident by that Assemblie at Edinburgh Iuly 1568. wherein the members of the Generall Assemblie are divided in two Ranks some are appointed to be ordinary and perpetuall members as Superintendents and Commissioners of Provinces the other sort are mutable as Commissioners of Churches Vniversities Townes and Provinces the first had no need of particular Commission but were perpetuall and first called in the Roll the other were changeable from Assemblie to Assemblie and had new particular Commissions from those by whom they were directed In the Assemblie at Edinburgh 1563. that every Superintendent shall appear the first day of the Assemblie at Edinburgh March 1578. the same Act is renewed and Bishops also are appointed to be present at all Assemblies or else to be accounted unworthy of the office and by divers other Acts yea after that the othee of Bishops begun to be questioned in the Assemblie 1579. Iuly 7. Sess. 9. It is ordained That Bishops and Comâ—issâ—ouers of Provinces who abjent themselves from 〈◊〉 Assemblies shall be censured according to the Act august 12. 1575. and that Act to be understood not onely 〈◊〉 Bishops having power of Visitation from the Church but also of such as have not that office Fourthly As all Bishops have power to hold their Synods twice in the year when and where it
doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith From this then that we have shown to be true we may bring a forcible argument to prove that by this abjuration the power and preheminence of Bishops is not abjured For this abjuration being but an Appendix deduced by necessary consequence it could not of it self have another meaning or at least not a contrary sense to that Confession whereupon it depends but so it is that the meaning of the Confession of Faith as it was explained by the Church was no other but that it was lawfull for one Pastor to have this power preheminencie over others c. Therfore the abjuration could not have a contrary meaning towit that this power and preheminencie was unlawfull in it self The assumption of this argument is already sufficiently qualified in the former Chapter by the book of Discipline Acts of divers generall Assemblies and long continued practice of the Church The proposition is evident in it self for it is an absurd thing to say that an Appendix should have a contrary sense to the principall proposition from whence it is deduced by necessary consequence all good Logicians know this of which number to my knowledge the Moderator is one who hath in his time composed many accurate propositions with their Appendices and would not have suffered one of his Schollers with patience to set down their Thesis with so evill knit consequences as they would make us beleeve is betwixt the confession of Faith and the Abjuration of the Covenant depending thereupon I can finde no reason why he and other learned men of that Assemblie should be so farre misled against all true Logick and sound reason except it be as appeares that they have captivated their understanding to the Tables of the Covenant that for obedience thereto they have forgot all rules of Logick to advance per fas nefas their Idoll of Presbyteriall Government But our Covenanters objects that albeit the Confession of Faith might have been understood so by those who have set it down and so interpreted by the Church for a long time as that thereby this power and preheminency was not condemned yet the Generall Assembly of the Church to whom it appertaines to interpret the Confession of Faith might understand and interpret it otherwise as it did in that Assembly at Dundie 1580. wherein Episcopacie was condemned and now in this Assembly at Glasgow 1639. To this we answer first It is possible indeed that men might understand it otherwise then it was understood at the beginning yea in a contrary sense as the Covenanters doe interpret it now But the Question is whether both those contrary sense can be the true meaning of the Confession I hope they will not judge so except they would make the Confession of Faith like a nose of wax as some blasphemous Papists speak of the Scripture or that they would make the Confession which ought to be a firme and constant rule to try the doctrine of all within the Church like a Lesbian rule which may be applyed both to crooked and straight lines or to contrary and contradictory senses Then if it be so it may be asked which of those is the true meaning Certainely there is no reasonable man but will esteeme that to be the true meaning which is intended and expressed by the author thereof For as we say Vnusquique est suâ—ruâ—â— verborum optimus interpres except such a one as speaketh non-sense but so it is that they that framed the Confession of the Church of Scotland and the Church who received the same did declare their meaning therein to be such as that thereby this power and preheminencie was not damned but directly approved Therefore that contrary meaning which they ascribe to the Church in the year 1580. 1581. 1590. must needs be false Secondly This Covenant and abjuration therein was neither framed by the Authoritie of the Church or generall Assembly nor was the Oath required by their Authoritie but both was done by the Authoritie of the King and Councell at whose direction this Covenant and abjuration was framed and the Oath and subscription thereto required of all his Subjects by his Commandment therefore it appertaineth onely to his Majestie and Councell to declare the meaning thereof and in what sense he did require the Oath of all his Subjects For this is a most true Axiom agreed unto by all orthodox writers That all Oathes required by a Magistrate should be taken according to the direct and plaine meaning of him who requireth the same But it is most manifest that neither the King nor Councell did require that oath in such a sense as thereby Episcopacie should be condemned for he and his Councell did plainely declare before that time at that same very time and many times afterward that his expresse meaning purpose and constant intention was to continue the estate and office of a Bishop in the Church of Scotland and to withstand all motions tending to the overthrow thereof as we shall shew more particularly For first that this abjuration was set forth by the King and Councels appointment and that by his Authoritie onely the Oath was required is manifest both by that Act of Councell March 5. 1580. which they have prefixed before their Rebellious Covenant pressing thereby to make people beleeve that it was authorized by the King as likewise by the Acts of Assembly cited here by themselves wherein is declared That the Kings Commissioner presented to the Assembly in April 1581. the Confession of Faith subscribed by the King and his houshold not long before and in that Act approving this Confession cited here by them it is expresly acknowledged that it was set forth by the Kings Majestie Next that it was to be understood according to the Kings Majesties meaning appeareth also by the same Act where it is said That it should be followed out efoldly as the same is laid out in the Kings Proclamation for that word Efoldly signifieth that they should follow not onely the words but likewise the sense and meaning which was intended in his Majesties proclamation not in a twofold sense as if the Assemblie would intend one sense and the King another but simply and sincerely by all in the same words and meaning which his Majestie did expresse in his Proclamation Thirdly that his Majestie did not intend that it should be sworn and subscribed in such a sense or meaning as that thereby Episcopacie should be condemned is also most manifest 1. By his Majestie and Councell often rejecting the instant petitions of divers Assemblies for establishing the second book of Discipline whereby the power of Bishops is impaired and absolute paritie of all Pastors established as they acknowledge themselves by that Act of the Assembly at Glasgow 1581. cited here by them wherein are these words Because divers suits have been made to the Magistrate for approbation to the book of Policie which yet have taken no great effect Then because
Native Countrey promising by their letters and subscription of blank papers to give way and assistance to the King of Spaines Navie to enter within the bowels of the Kingdome No marvell therefore although in so perillous a time when a totall ruine both of Church and Kingdome of Policie and Religion was feared and threatned the King and estate thought it fit for eschewing the present danger to give way at that time to those new Disciplinarians suffering that Act of Parliament to passe in their favour fearing that if they should have resisted their present importunity turbulent spirits as some of them were might have made a further distraction even amongst these who adhered to the true Religion whereby an other gate might have been opened for the entrie of forraigne enemies and so the estate being thus devided should have been lesse able to resist the common enemie This was the very true reason whereby his Majestie was in a manner forced to condescend to this Act whereof they brag so much contrary to his own judgement and constant intention as is evident by that which followed for no sooner was that blast past and that Conspiracie repressed but King Iames of happie memory did set himself more earnestly than ever he did before to re-establish Episcopall government and bear down that new discipline the evils and corruptions whereof disturbing both Church and Common-wealth he perceived daily more and more 3 We must remark that this Act of Parliament 1592. was the first that ever did allow presbyteriall Government by a Law and therefore ought to be accounted the first establishment thereof in the Kingdome of Scotland whereby it appears how short a continuance it had in this Church and how soone it became loathsome to all estates of persons Spuria putamina non agunt altas radices For not full eight years after this in the Assemblie at Montrosse 1600. it received a great blow and Episcopacie was by one step more advanced wherein it was concluded that a certaine number of ministers who were nominated by the King should supply the place of Bishops by voycing in Parliament in name of the Church and to have a care of the generall affaires thereof under the name of Commissioners whose power was inlarged by that Assembly at Haliruâ—house 1602. and Bishops thereafter under their own proper title were established in their full power and Iurisdiction by the generall Assemblies of the Church 1606. 1608. 1610. solemnly ratified by consent of the three Estates in Parliament 1612. 4. We cannot omit that Act cited out of the Assemblie March 1589. wherein it is said for asmuch as the Neighbour Kirk in England is understood to be heavily troubled for maintaining of the true Discipline and Government whose griefes ought to move us therefore the Presbyterie of Edinburgh was ordained to comfort the said Church in the said matter I cannot conceive whom they call The Church of England here except it be some few Schismaticks who a little before this time were challenged before the Starre-chamber for disturbing the Church and Kingdome by promoting unto the people a new forme of Discipline different in many points both from the Scottish Discipline and that of Geneva who because they did obstinately refuse to answere to some interrogatories proposed to them by the Councell of England were committed to prison of which number was one Wigintone who stirred up three fanaticall fellows Edmund Coppinger William Hacket and Henry Arthington to labour for their relief perswading them that they were extraordinarily called thereto Hacket being mightily possessed by this humour did give out that Christ was descended from heaven with his fan in his hand and had called him extraordinarily to purge both Church and Common-wealth he sent out before him his two principall Prophets Coppinger and Arthington to whom he assigned a diverse charge that Coppinger should offer grace and mercie to the people if they would beleeve and follow him for the relief of the faithfull servants of God and Arthingtone should denounce Gods wrath and eternall damnation to unbeleevers who would not adhere to them those two being sent by Hacket came to the streets of London and did preach according to their charge railing impudently against the Queen and Councell declaring openly that she was fallen from her right to the Crowne and that Hacket was their King whom they ought to obey being placed in Christs stead whereby they moved great multitudes of the Common people to follow them but before they could effectuate their purpose they were prevented by certaine of the Councell sent by the Queen who apprehended them in the very Act at Cheapside the 16. of Iuly 1591. for the which cause Hacket was executed as a Traitor Coppinger killed himself in prison and Arthington repenting him of his madnesse did confesse their whole proceedings in whose Confession it was declared that they had received an incouragement to this attempt from Scotland by the means of one Penry who having been a certaine space a Preacher in Scotland waâ— returned a little before this enterprise and was lurking then in the City of London or in some place thereabouts this Penry was chiefly the man who procured these consolatorie letters from the Assembly to his Companions to the great disgrace of the Church of Scotland as having given encouragement to further such a treasonable attempt and apparantly that letter written from Scotland by one Gibson to Coppinger was one of these consolatorie letters ordained by the Assemblie to be written to them wherein he saith The best of our Ministers are most carefull of your estate and have sent for that effect a Preacher of our Church to wit Penry this last sommer 1590. of purpose to conferre with the best affected Ministers of your Church to lay down a plot how our Church might best travell for â—our relief I have heard some of the wisest and gravest of the Ministrie of Scotland at that time who did heavily regrate that the Church of Scotland was mightily abused by this Penry who although he was for a time in great estimation amongst the people and some of the chief Ministers likewise yet they found him at last an arrant Kâ—ave I am sorry that the Brethren of this Assemblie have been so inconsiderate as to refricare banâ— scabieâ— in calling to remembrance again that opproâ—ric of the Church of Scotland in these times as having had two deep a hand in that attempt to stirre up a Combustion in our Neighbour Kingdome and Church but our Covenanters are so farre from being ashamed thereof as they cease not as yet to use all meanes to doe the like if they could find in England such fanaticall fellows as Hacket and Coppinger CHAP. XV Discussing the Conclusion of the Act NOw after they have set down their confused rapsody of Reasons for proving the determination of their Assembly they conclude in these Hyperbolicall termes All which and many other reasons being publikly read and particularly at great length